Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1887-10-05
YANKToN
wa PUT.

Colonel j. O. Warnook, editor of the
democratic jamestown Capital, writes as
follows to the ST. Paul Pioneer Press:
The discussion OF questions OF nation
al and state policy by correspondents OF
the pubic press bring out some very
amusing ideas, and perhaps 1t might not
De undertaking to say, ridiculous Ideas.
Just now the subject uppermost and
foremost IN the Dakota mind. and OF
most general discussion, is the division
question. All the arguments, pro and
con, OF which the question 10 susceptible,
have been presented time and again, and
the interest in the argument now centers
principally in the infinite series of trans
formations in which they can be present
ed. The anti-dlvisionists have rung the
changes of "grand empire state" until
tbepoetry andsentiment have been worn
out of it, and no man with the fear of
the chestnut bell before his eyes will
hazard repetition of that stale argu-
ment p in mixed crowd. The advo-
Gates of the one.state idea now resort to
the manipulation OF statistics to brace
up their rapidly waning cause. By sci
cot comparisons they show that the cost
OF maintaining state government in a
large state is less per capita than in q
smaller state, and hatter themselves
that they have made an argument which
ought to convince any one, and at once
and forever settle the question in favor
of one state embracing the whole terri
tory.
My erring friend Quinn, OF Bismarck
laya stress upon an exhibit of this kind.
bis strong point in favor OF the one
state iGea seems to be economy, and this
be attempts to establish by comparison
OF few states which favor his view.
LII the rule he attempts to establish BY q
few isolated citations would hold good
through the whole list of states it would
have added weight to the argument
among thinkers TO have given the list
entire. His garbling it lnstlfies the sus-
plcion that his purpose was to carry u
point whether the facts justified it or not
Arguments which appeal to the pocket
will sometimes and with some people
outweigh those which appeal to the
judgment. LII cheapness is the desidera.
tum. as MIR. Quinn seems to regard it,
the argnmeDt Is against any govern
ment. Mr.. Qainn's economical argu-
ment, followed to logical conclusion,
leads into the camp OF the anarchists, o
political condition we are quite sure he
Woala nov embrace even II IL would add
force to his specious argument against
the division OF Dakota territory.
lie shows by few selected eompaE;-
SONS that the government of the large
! state OF Texas costs less per capita than
the smaller state OF Louisiana: that the
state government OF Missouri costs lese
POI oaplts thant ne smaller state OF Ohio;
thst the state government of Vermont
ooses iess per capita than the dimlnu-
tive state OF Rhode Island; that the state
government OF new fork COSTS Less per
sap,'a a az taah 'ne smaller state OF Maine.
hnu 1bls he oHers as an argument
seainss Lnahins TWO states OF the terrl-
sony oi OaKoea.
Arausposo .ne comparisons and his
arg anene a, aooRs 1a ,lAe ~ nao peen ssfnck
uy aeyciohs. Hol lnesanoe, compare
.ue stases VI tuuis.hph , anu malhe' tn
tne lorIuel auu larger tne per capita
expense OF STATE governments as given
uy mL. Sainn hithaeit' Is $i So, ana IN
n1 sne iat.ef hna em Aier ~ 10 SI'o4. In
i.nooe Aeihnu ene psr G Sapita expense oi
s'a.e eovelhlnent 10 Sl.4zi Whiie IN Ine
larger s.ate oi ORio ~ ls %l.ou. ana IN
i.i Sue 81 SILL IL larger state OF Louisiana 1t Is
@l'so tsklsR ms own seieoted lew
eV@ees tot COMPARISON tney prove aa
u, much esa!hss his pioposition as ioF 1t,
Ing argumeh. Is just as goou on the one
slae as the otner, ana is NOT worth
ns n,oI'iphs . s9rsous cohsio GRAFTON on either.
Auo atBonens ID iaiiaclous, because IL
assumes STATE OF iacts that does not
exist. IL carries Win ~ the luea that
al' thls money is ABSORBED ey the sal,
aries Oh sne stste olnoefs, When the fact
is only small portion OF IL IS 80 CON
suneo. ~ 10 mlsleadinR IN that
suriepSi.lousiy conveys ihe am
pfest iol .naI ehs neeu OF every family Is
equiIeu 20 pay the amount stated Tor
each meihoef ot MS nonsehoia 70 sus.
lalh ss ana ID naantain STATE government and
ouoers, "neu III ihct, the money ioi
s.a'e expenses ~ ,eised py properly tax
asioh anu Is paia oy NONRESIDENT owners
oi piope..s III 'he ssate as well as by
susi cltes. ,
Hee US olscaro .nis pe.tl'oRRing and
oeRgins me question ana meet the is-
sus anu aispose y. AZ upon its merits
nos ae par 'isnps etttfins iof poittical ao
santaee, nov e.s as capi'a'to~n.i0 @ specula-
eors' nos % oli,ceno.ders or once seekers
who Ieaf 70 submit thelf claims 10 posi-
OF their peers at the bsltot-box, but at
Dakotans 10 the manor born. an
ee .u W oon'eoe ,, nos 'eiy eaAaseu iaeA o